CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ7768905
Regular
Sep 13, 2016

TRACEY LOMBARDI vs. SCRIPPS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, SEDGWICK CMS

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the applicant's petition, which sought disqualification of the administrative law judge, removal, and reconsideration. The disqualification petition was denied as untimely, filed after the swearing of the first witness. The removal petition failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Finally, the reconsideration petition was dismissed because it did not seek review of a final order, but rather an interlocutory procedural decision.

Workers' Compensation Appeals BoardPetition for DisqualificationPetition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationLabor Code Section 5311Appeals Board Rule 10452Untimely PetitionExtraordinary RemedySubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable Harm
References
6
Case No. ADJ3865022 (LAO 837425) ADJ1234925 (LAO 837426) ADJ4652554 (LAO 889199) ADJ4467339 (LAO 889200)
Regular
Dec 08, 2008

MANUEL VILLARREAL vs. DELUXE LABORATORIES, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

The Appeals Board denied Defendant's petition for removal, finding no substantial prejudice or irreparable harm, and dismissed their petition for reconsideration as it was not from a final order. The Board noted that Applicant's refiling of dismissed claims was procedurally irregular and that the WCJ incorrectly denied dismissal on procedural grounds without addressing the substantive issue of good cause for relief from dismissal. The case is returned to the trial level for the WCJ to consider Defendant's contention that Applicant must show good cause to set aside the earlier dismissal order and to potentially dismiss the later-filed applications.

Petition for RemovalPetition for ReconsiderationWCJDismissal Without PrejudiceDuplicate ClaimsStatute of LimitationsLabor Code Section 5405Applications for Adjudication of ClaimNotice of Intention to DismissGood Cause to Set Aside Dismissal
References
6
Case No. ADJ176141
Regular
Jul 06, 2012

LUCIA RUIZ vs. SUBWAY, STATE FARM INSURANCE

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed Managedmed Inc.'s petition for reconsideration of an order dismissing its lien claim. The dismissal was based on Managedmed's failure to serve a copy of the petition on defense counsel, which is a mandatory procedural requirement. While Managedmed cited computer issues for its initial non-appearance at a lien conference, the Appeals Board found this argument irrelevant to the procedural defect of non-service of the petition. Failure to properly serve is a proper ground for dismissal of a petition for reconsideration.

Petition for ReconsiderationLien ConferenceOrder Dismissing Lien ClaimsWCJLien ClaimantFailure to AppearNotice of Intent to DismissService of ProcessAdverse PartiesProof of Service
References
4
Case No. ADJ6892572
Regular
Mar 05, 2012

RAFAEL RODRIGUEZ, RAFAEL CORREA-RODRIGUEZ vs. SURFACE CONSTRUCTORS, INC., FIRSTCOMP For ENDURANCE INSURANCE COMPANY

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition for reconsideration filed by Rafael Rodriguez (also known as Rafael Correa-Rodriguez). The dismissal was based on two procedural defects: the petition was untimely filed and improperly served. The WCAB further indicated that even if the petition had been procedurally sound, it would have been denied on the merits based on the WCJ's report. Therefore, the petition for reconsideration was dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationUntimely FilingImproper ServiceWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardWCJ Report and RecommendationDismissalDenial on MeritsLien ClaimantSurface ConstructorsFirstcomp
References
0
Case No. ADJ2912733 (VNO 0470821)
Regular
Dec 02, 2013

PAMELA WARD vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Pamela Ward's petition for reconsideration. This dismissal was not based on the merits of her petition, but rather on the procedural issue that a petition for reconsideration can only be filed after a final order. The WCAB's prior order granting reconsideration was found not to be a final order under Labor Code § 5900. Therefore, Ward's petition was procedurally defective and consequently dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationFinal OrderInterlocutory OrderLabor Code § 5900Gumilla v. Industrial Acc. Com.Safeway Stores v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Dufault v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.Ortiz v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.City of Los Angeles v. Industrial Acc. Com.Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
5
Case No. ADJ3630039 (MON 0266628)
Regular
Sep 24, 2013

GWENDOLYN MATTHEWS-BROWN vs. TOTAL AMERICA; LIBERTY MUTUAL

This case involves a Petition for Reconsideration filed by Gwendolyn Matthews-Brown against Total America and Liberty Mutual. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed the petition. The dismissal was based on two procedural defects: the petition was not verified as required by Labor Code section 5902 and it was not properly served on all parties on the official address record per California Code of Regulations section 10505. Consequently, the WCAB found the petition procedurally deficient and ordered it dismissed.

Petition for ReconsiderationVerifiedLabor Code section 5902Serve PartiesOfficial Address RecordCalifornia Code Regulations title 8 section 10505DismissedWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardAdministrative Law JudgeWCJ
References
1
Case No. ADJ11449733
Regular
Dec 16, 2019

EDWIN FLORES vs. ADP TOTALSOURCE FL XVI, INC.; MEADOWBROOK SENIOR LIVING; HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the defendant's Petition for Reconsideration because it was taken from an interlocutory procedural order, not a final decision. Such orders, like the denial of a motion to dismiss, do not determine substantive rights or liabilities. The Board also noted that even if treated as a removal petition, it would have been denied as the defendant failed to show substantial prejudice or irreparable harm. Therefore, the petition was dismissed as procedurally improper.

Petition for ReconsiderationDismissalFinal OrderSubstantive RightThreshold IssueInterlocutory Procedural OrderRemovalSubstantial PrejudiceIrreparable HarmExtraordinary Remedy
References
6
Case No. ADJ7719844
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

ANGELINA PRECIADO vs. DMS FACILITY SERVICES, CARL WARREN AND COMPANY

Lien claimants Komberg Chiropractic and Archie Mays petitioned for reconsideration after their liens were dismissed for failure to appear at an arbitration hearing. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed their petition because it failed to comply with procedural rules, specifically the requirement to serve the petition on the Appeals Board in San Francisco. Even if the procedural defects were ignored, the WCAB would have denied the petition on the merits, upholding the arbitrator's dismissal of the liens.

Lien claimantsPetition for reconsiderationWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardArbitration hearingDismissed liensProof of serviceEAMSMPNCalifornia Code of RegulationsLabor Codes
References
0
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

State Division of Human Rights v. Bakery & Confectionary Workers' International Union of America, Local 429

This legal decision pertains to a motion that was granted and an appeal that was subsequently dismissed. The dismissal was predicated on the finding that the appellant was not considered an aggrieved party by the modification made at the Appellate Division, referencing CPLR 5601, subdivision [a], paragraph [iii]. Furthermore, the order specifies that the timeframe within which the appellant may pursue permission to appeal will be computed in accordance with the provisions of CPLR 5513, as per CPLR 5514, subdivision [a]. The decision highlights a procedural aspect of legal appeals, specifically addressing the criteria for an appellant to be considered "aggrieved." The court's action of granting the motion and dismissing the appeal underscores the importance of proper standing in appellate proceedings. This ruling impacts how future appeals are processed concerning modifications made at the Appellate Division. The explicit mention of CPLR sections indicates a reliance on specific procedural codes for determining both the appeal's viability and the subsequent calculation of time limits for further legal action.

MotionAppealDismissalCPLRAppellate ProcedureAggrieved PartyJurisdictionProcedural LawLegal StandingTime Limits
References
0
Case No. BGN 63300; BGN 63301 BGN 63302; BGN 63303
Regular
Mar 06, 2008

HARDISTENE HOWARD vs. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, RTD; TRAVELERS

The applicant filed a "Petition the Court for Judge Dismissal" alleging a violation of Labor Code section 5312 by the Workers' Compensation Judge. The Board treated this as a petition for disqualification, but dismissed it because it lacked the required affidavit of disqualification and did not state grounds for disqualification under Code of Civil Procedure section 641.

Petition for disqualificationLabor Code section 5311Petition for removalLabor Code section 5310WCAB Rule 10452Mandatory settlement conferenceWCJWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardUnrepresented applicantProof of service
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 14,091 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational